we just disgree, and that's coo - I just think that the TOP offense was an improvement over what Barians wanted to do, and it looked to me that it was shaping up nicely until the injury. Just my two cents.

Arians offense was always near the top in the league in TOP - that was always a manufactured problem by the fans.

So Arians wasn't the answer
Haley wasn't the answer
Marty wasn't the answer

Who exactly is there left to dissect?

The QB is all I can think of.

__________________MacReady: Beaver pics - don't think we're in much shape to do anything about this threadChilds: Well, what do we do?MacReady: Why don't we just . . .wait here and post for a little while longer . . . see what happens?

The Following User Says Thank You to steelfury02 For This Useful Post:

I love Terry Bradshaw. I grew up watching him lead the Steelers to all those Super Bowls. But those of you that say Ben isn't in the same league as Bradshaw have a serious case of revisionist history. I won't even list numbers. It was a different game back then. Terry had a lot of terrible games. I'm talking 3 or 4 interception games. Games he lost all by himself.

Now that that's out of the way, here's the thing that is apparantly escapes many of you. Bradshaw played with the greatest collection of talent to ever grace a football field. What is it that you guys don't understand about that. He had a HOF RB, 2 HOF receivers, The best offensive line of his era with multiple HOF, and the greatest collection of defensive talent ever with HOF players everywhere. He could play horrible football, and the team could still win. Ben played one super bowl like that and you all bring up that game in every post you make here as an argument against Ben. It's laughable. Bradshaw was horrible in our first SB victory against the Vikings, and he was a much more experienced QB than Ben was in his first SB.

The Bottom line here is that Ben has done more with less talent than Bradshaw could ever dream about. He is much more consistent than Bradshaw ever was, and is much better at bringing his team from behind and last-minute scoring drives. This really isn't arguable. Again, I love Bradshaw. He was a great quarterback and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. That being said, I believe Ben is a better quarterback than Bradshaw. If he had that kind of talent around him, the Steelers would almost never lose a game. They would be unstoppable. The talent gap between each other's teammates is staggering. How could you not see this?

I love Terry Bradshaw. I grew up watching him lead the Steelers to all those Super Bowls. But those of you that say Ben isn't in the same league as Bradshaw have a serious case of revisionist history. I won't even list numbers. It was a different game back then. Terry had a lot of terrible games. I'm talking 3 or 4 interception games. Games he lost all by himself.

Now that that's out of the way, here's the thing that is apparantly escapes many of you. Bradshaw played with the greatest collection of talent to ever grace a football field. What is it that you guys don't understand about that. He had a HOF RB, 2 HOF receivers, The best offensive line of his era with multiple HOF, and the greatest collection of defensive talent ever with HOF players everywhere. He could play horrible football, and the team could still win. Ben played one super bowl like that and you all bring up that game in every post you make here as an argument against Ben. It's laughable. Bradshaw was horrible in our first SB victory against the Vikings, and he was a much more experienced QB than Ben was in his first SB.

The Bottom line here is that Ben has done more with less talent than Bradshaw could ever dream about. He is much more consistent than Bradshaw ever was, and is much better at bringing his team from behind and last-minute scoring drives. This really isn't arguable. Again, I love Bradshaw. He was a great quarterback and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. That being said, I believe Ben is a better quarterback than Bradshaw. If he had that kind of talent around him, the Steelers would almost never lose a game. They would be unstoppable. The talent gap between each other's teammates is staggering. How could you not see this?

Bingo. I couldn't have said it better and agree 100%. However, you must remember that most of the people making these assertions are young adults/kids who are either too young to remember Bradshaw or weren't even born until after he retired and whose only point of reference of his career are four rings, four old Super Bowl highlight reels with John Facenda waxing poetic about his skills as a field general and the fact that he made the recent "Top 100 Players in NFL History" list.

I love Terry Bradshaw. I grew up watching him lead the Steelers to all those Super Bowls. But those of you that say Ben isn't in the same league as Bradshaw have a serious case of revisionist history. I won't even list numbers. It was a different game back then. Terry had a lot of terrible games. I'm talking 3 or 4 interception games. Games he lost all by himself.

Now that that's out of the way, here's the thing that is apparantly escapes many of you. Bradshaw played with the greatest collection of talent to ever grace a football field. What is it that you guys don't understand about that. He had a HOF RB, 2 HOF receivers, The best offensive line of his era with multiple HOF, and the greatest collection of defensive talent ever with HOF players everywhere. He could play horrible football, and the team could still win. Ben played one super bowl like that and you all bring up that game in every post you make here as an argument against Ben. It's laughable. Bradshaw was horrible in our first SB victory against the Vikings, and he was a much more experienced QB than Ben was in his first SB.

The Bottom line here is that Ben has done more with less talent than Bradshaw could ever dream about. He is much more consistent than Bradshaw ever was, and is much better at bringing his team from behind and last-minute scoring drives. This really isn't arguable. Again, I love Bradshaw. He was a great quarterback and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. That being said, I believe Ben is a better quarterback than Bradshaw. If he had that kind of talent around him, the Steelers would almost never lose a game. They would be unstoppable. The talent gap between each other's teammates is staggering. How could you not see this?

i also concur. You are exactly correct. The fact is - Ben is a better QB than Bradshaw was. I can't even imagine the kind of numbers and victories Ben would have put up with that team around him.
I like the history of Bradshaw here and he's a legend - but all this crying about Terry is ridiculous. He was absolutely hated here - all the way up to and including his retirement.

And what you Ben groupies seem to forget is that Bradshaw liked to put the ball where his receivers could catch it. He ran Chuck Noll's offense by Chuck's gameplan, but called he called the plays. He wasn't easy to sack either, and he wasn't afraid to pull it down and run for a first down. I won't argue that Swann and Stalworth both belong in the HOF, as well as Rocky and Franco, and the line. What you BR fans don't dare face is that Bradshaw didn't resist handing the ball off and throwing it those men. He could throw long, and often threw short, and the receivers knew where the defense was by how Terry's pass traveled. Bradshaw was more interested in what worked than what he wanted to do, or his own stats, and he didn't have lie about it, the way our current, all stats, no points QB does. Bradshaw really did orchestrate the offense. Ben tries to and fails, and when he has had coordinators that are smart enough to recognize that Ben isn't smart he resists them and their efforts to move the ball on purpose rather than by luck.

Bradshaw contributed to championships, Ben has been dragged along for the ride, but takes the bow as if he is carrying the team without help. Yes, he has been key, in almost as many wins as he was key in losses. He could be a very good QB, but he has not yet been more of an asset than a liability to the team. He is selfish on the field and off, and given the choice will put himself above the team even in competition. He stands in and takes the hit because it accomplishes his goals. If he doesn't feel like hitting the wide open receiver for a first down, he holds the ball, or attempts the forced deep pass for an interception. No, he is not even close to Bradshaw's level.

And what you Ben groupies seem to forget is that Bradshaw liked to put the ball where his receivers could catch it. He ran Chuck Noll's offense by Chuck's gameplan, but called he called the plays. He wasn't easy to sack either, and he wasn't afraid to pull it down and run for a first down. I won't argue that Swann and Stalworth both belong in the HOF, as well as Rocky and Franco, and the line. What you BR fans don't dare face is that Bradshaw didn't resist handing the ball off and throwing it those men. He could throw long, and often threw short, and the receivers knew where the defense was by how Terry's pass traveled. Bradshaw was more interested in what worked than what he wanted to do, or his own stats, and he didn't have lie about it, the way our current, all stats, no points QB does. Bradshaw really did orchestrate the offense. Ben tries to and fails, and when he has had coordinators that are smart enough to recognize that Ben isn't smart he resists them and their efforts to move the ball on purpose rather than by luck.

Bradshaw contributed to championships, Ben has been dragged along for the ride, but takes the bow as if he is carrying the team without help. Yes, he has been key, in almost as many wins as he was key in losses. He could be a very good QB, but he has not yet been more of an asset than a liability to the team. He is selfish on the field and off, and given the choice will put himself above the team even in competition. He stands in and takes the hit because it accomplishes his goals. If he doesn't feel like hitting the wide open receiver for a first down, he holds the ball, or attempts the forced deep pass for an interception. No, he is not even close to Bradshaw's level.

Bradshaw had the better deep ball, I'll give him that. That's it. Accuracy? You kidding me? We're talking about a guy who on his career completed less than 52% of his passes. How many times did Swann have to leap about six feet in the air to pull in a Bradshaw pass? Too many to count. When Ben has multiple 20+ INT seasons on his resume like Bradshaw, let me know. And as far as forcing the deep ball, Bradshaw's entire mantra was "go deep." If Ben threw as many picks now as Bradshaw did, he'd get crucified even worse than he already is. That's a fact the Roethlisberger lynch mob doesn't seem to want to acknowledge.

And what you Ben groupies seem to forget is that Bradshaw liked to put the ball where his receivers could catch it. He ran Chuck Noll's offense by Chuck's gameplan, but called he called the plays. He wasn't easy to sack either, and he wasn't afraid to pull it down and run for a first down. I won't argue that Swann and Stalworth both belong in the HOF, as well as Rocky and Franco, and the line. What you BR fans don't dare face is that Bradshaw didn't resist handing the ball off and throwing it those men. He could throw long, and often threw short, and the receivers knew where the defense was by how Terry's pass traveled. Bradshaw was more interested in what worked than what he wanted to do, or his own stats, and he didn't have lie about it, the way our current, all stats, no points QB does. Bradshaw really did orchestrate the offense. Ben tries to and fails, and when he has had coordinators that are smart enough to recognize that Ben isn't smart he resists them and their efforts to move the ball on purpose rather than by luck.

Bradshaw contributed to championships, Ben has been dragged along for the ride, but takes the bow as if he is carrying the team without help. Yes, he has been key, in almost as many wins as he was key in losses. He could be a very good QB, but he has not yet been more of an asset than a liability to the team. He is selfish on the field and off, and given the choice will put himself above the team even in competition. He stands in and takes the hit because it accomplishes his goals. If he doesn't feel like hitting the wide open receiver for a first down, he holds the ball, or attempts the forced deep pass for an interception. No, he is not even close to Bradshaw's level.

If Bradshaw was so freaking accurate explain his 52% completion rate, better yet explain how he could throw 212 Ints to 210 TD. A man who "put the ball where his receivers could catch it" yet threw an INT for nearly every TD and completed a little over 1 of 2 passes he threw must of had some bad Receivers to do no better than that. Hater Hater Hater, it kills you and others that Ben is the best thing to happen to this team since Terry. You try to selectively remember all the former greats and their glory yet you either were not there or refuse to believe the ones who actually saw those greats play. Terry was good and he threw the best long ball ever, but he was notoriously inaccurate, fire bullets from short range that where nearly uncatchable, would throw into double, triple coverage and leave you sratching your head wondering WTF. We all know from too many that Ben has done nothing to contribute to this team since hes been here, furthermore its his fault we cant run the ball but at a 3.7 yd per clip, its his fault that the defense can no longer produce sacks or turnovers, its his fault that the ST play is so crappy, its also his fault that we had numerous injuries this year, its his fault he is not Peyton or Brady. If he was Brady or Peyton ya'll would be giving him hell for losing the last 3 SB hes been too, good night.

I would have to respectfully disagree with the notion that the Todd Haley offense is ďMarty ball.Ē From what Iíve seen, it is more like the Ken Whisenhunt offense that he used when Tommy Maddox was the quarterback. In that offense, the quarterback is expected to stand in the pocket, and spread the ball around, using quick throws. It was an ideal offense for a quarterback like Maddox, but it doesnít suit the skill-set of Ben Roethlisberger, nor would it have been good for Bradshaw, since weíre talking about him, too.
During some series of downs, Todd Haley does use the ďMarty BallĒ run-run-pass, but thatís not all that he does. In the final Cleveland game, the Todd Haley offense looked a little better. Thatís not saying a lot against a team like the Browns, but it probably was enough to ensure him a second season as the Steelers OC. By next season, they will have made some player changes on offense, and the remaining players will have had more time to work on things. Itís a wait-and-see as to whether the Todd Haley offense comes around, or remains a flop.
This whole Todd Haley thing reminds me of the time when the Rooneys forced Chuck Knoll to take on Joe Walton as his offensive coordinator. The Walton passing offense was a complete change from the Tom Moore offense that had been in place for a while. The Steelers didnít have the players to run the Walton offense, and the team didnít pick it up. Of course, a lot of the problem was on Walton, because the offense was too complex for a football team to remember, and run. It had dozens of formations, and hundreds of plays. The Joe Walton stint with the Steelers is a story unto itself, but the situation is similar to what we have now with Todd Haley and it could end the same way, as a big mistake.